On Wed, 2006-03-08 at 15:48 +0100, Thomas Anders wrote:
> Don't we have an existing release policy to apply here? As the two of 
> you are also the main authors of that document: do you feel the 
> principles have been followed?

Hmmm.... perhaps not.
Except perhaps the paragraph immediately following the enumerated
list of basic principles :-)   I must admit that I hadn't twigged
that Wes' announcement had gone to -users rather than -coders.

But you're right - we should really be applying +3 voting.


> While we are at discussing 5.1.x, how are we going to deal with
> the "Coverity bugs" and 5.1.x (and 5.0.x)?

My gut reaction is to say that the Coverity bugs should be
considered w.r.t 5.2.x and above.  The 5.1.x and 5.0.x lines
are basically being closed down - fixing lots of (?minor)
bugs doesn't really seem worth it.

Dave


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language
that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast
and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
Net-snmp-coders mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders

Reply via email to